Emphasis on the "may." From the DailyNews:

The Secretary of State's Political Reform Division has ordered Save Our License, a group opposed to driver's licenses for illegal immigrants, to refile all its committee documents and submit all its campaign finance data.

Meanwhile, a group representing Latino and church groups across the nation this week filed a formal complaint with the state Fair Political Practices Commission, saying Save Our License willfully violated campaign finance laws...

...Since Save Our License opposes a specific subject, its original filing as a general purpose committee is not valid, said Harvey Tsuboi, a senior analyst with the Secretary of State's Political Reform Division.

"I asked them to amend their committee designation from general purpose to primarily formed (ballot measure) committee," Tsuboi said. "They need to turn in their campaign finance reports and refile their original statement of organization."

...On Monday, the Greenlining Institute, a Democratic activist organization based in Berkeley, filed a complaint with the Fair Political Practices Commission, demanding that Save Our License receive the maximum fine from the state -- more than $10,000. The coalition of minority churches and business associations also urged the state to throw out all signatures collected by the group --about 400,000 to date, according to Save Our License -- because financial documents have not been filed...

As per custom, when hearing for the first time about an "activist group" or a "human rights" group, google their name plus "ford foundation". That results in 70 hits. There might be direct links in that list, or they might all be directories. But, they're in the same sphere.

In their words:

The Greenlining Institute works to improve the quality of life for low-income and minority communities. The institute emerged form the Greenlining Coalition, perhaps the oldest coalition of African American, Asian American/Pacific Islander, and Latino community leaders organized around a common purpose. With the formal founding of the Institute in 1993, Greenlining set out to create an antidote to redlining, the illegal yet common practice of denying, limiting, or overcharging for financial services and products to low-income and minority communities.

At least they've covered all - or, well, OK, most all - bases. As their pages and reports make clear, it's all about the "minorities."

From Paul Craig Roberts:

... Recently California Republican gubernatorial candidate Richard Riordan, seeking immigrant votes, addressed the Greenlining Institute, a "nonprofit" organization of Asians, Latinos and blacks that lobbies (illegally?) for minority benefits.

The Jan. 14 San Francisco Chronicle described Mr. Riordan's audience as minority businessmen, but the newspaper reported that the audience's concerns were whether Mr. Riordan would support their goals for more income taxes on the rich and the repeal of Proposition 13, the landmark measure that limited California property taxes.

Few Americans know it, but many immigrant businesses originate in preferential financing or loan set-asides from the Small Business Administration. What many see as immigrant success is really the fruits of taxpayers' money...

Bob Gnaizda, their general counsel, praises Vicente Fox and his plans in 3/18/01's "Davis to Meet Mexican Leader Twice a Year
Fox arrives to inaugurate new cross-border Net link". This thread and this details their attempts to derail Ward Connerly's Prop. 54. One of their cohorts in that effort was MALDEF. They joined with MALDEF, LULAC, Cruz Bustamante, Marco Firebaugh, and other worthy groups in opposition to a similar measure.

Their first and latest 990's at guidestar.org don't show anything remarkable, but the names of their board might be of interest for further googling.

They're involved in some way with a $1.3 million grant from the Pew Charitable Trusts.

They tried to pass a law relating to campaign finance.

And, last but not least, consider their banking-related activities.

In 2002 they joined with the Mexican American Political Association to protest in front WestAmerica bank in Fresno. That might have been before Nativo Lopez became the president of MAPA. That bank wanted to merge with a smaller bank. Read their sleazy press release here.

The merger was approved:

...In an otherwise routine-looking 16-page letter approving Westamerica Bank's purchase of Kerman State Bank near Fresno, the Fed dedicated three sentences and a footnote to a nasty spat between community activists and David Payne, CEO of the San Rafael bank, which has eight East Bay branches and six in Solano County. Westamerica threatened a libel suit after the group complained publicly about Payne receiving compensation valued at $69 million in 2000, the bank's limited contributions to low-income areas and individuals, and the bank's relatively low Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) rating. The purchase moves Westamerica from the No. 6 spot in the Fresno market to being the fourth largest bank in the area. Footnote: In January, Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan spoke at The Greenlining Institute's Economic Development Summit in Oakland and encouraged attendees to send the Fed ideas on how to promote development in underserved communities.

And, from 1998's "Minority groups oppose `Godzilla' bank merger":

NationsBank Corp. Chief Executive Hugh McColl and BankAmerica Corp. Chief Executive Officer David Coulter defended their planned $60 billion merger to opponents led by The Greenlining Institute, a San Francisco group that promotes economic development in low-income and minority communities...

Perhaps in anticipation of this sort of criticism, NationsBank and BankAmerica in May unveiled a $350 billion, 10-year community development lending program designed to comply with the Community Reinvestment Act, a 1977 federal law that directs banks to lend in all the communities where they collect deposits...

And, from 1996's "Bank watchdog pushes bounds of fair play":

... The Greenlining Institute, a San Francisco-based public advocacy group, has detected villainous behavior on the part of Sumitomo Bank. This week, Greenlining filed a complaint with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. in San Francisco accusing Sumitomo's California subsidiary of discriminatory lending and hiring practices. The big losers, the complaint said, are African Americans and Latinos. The big winners, Japanese nationals and Japanese Americans...

Greenlining presented its allegations in its characteristic fashion, ambush-style. The nonprofit fired off copies of its complaint to the media, but neglected to deliver a copy to the bank. Thus, Sumitomo officials were in no position to issue a rebuttal and could only express lame surprise.

And Greenlining highlighted certain statistics that, while incriminating, were also misleading. It noted, for example, that of the 153 housing loans made by Sumitomo California in 1995, only one went to a black applicant. It neglected to point out that only five blacks applied for housing loans, and two of those applications were withdrawn.

Greenlining also blasted Sumitomo for failing to live up to a commitment it made three years ago -- to make $500 million in low-income and community-development loans to poor communities in the state. While those funds have not been dispersed, it's worth mentioning that the bank has another seven years to make good on its pledge.

In banking circles, the Greenlining Institute is sometimes referred to as the Greenmailing Institute -- based on the way it influences banks to use their money. Greenlining is able to leverage the bad publicity it creates for banks to further its goal; namely, increasing lending to minorities and low-income families, as outlined by the Community Reinvestment Act...